Cited by 61Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsMaternal and Neonatal Healthcare

Postpartum Doula and Peer Telephone Support for Postpartum Depression: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Gjerdingen, Dwenda Kay, McGovern, Patricia, Pratt, Rebekah, Johnson, Linda, Crow, Scott·2013·Journal of Primary Care & Community Health

Abstract

Objectives: This research provides the first test of feasibility of recruiting postpartum doulas and depressed mothers for a peer support intervention study and begins to evaluate the benefit of postpartum doula support and peer telephone support for at-risk mothers. Methods: The authors recruited postpartum doulas from national doula organizations, peer telephone supporters from nursing referrals, and mothers with depressive symptoms from 3 local hospitals, local medical practices, Web sites, and community organizations. Participating mothers were randomized to 3 groups—postpartum doula, peer telephone support, and control group. Surveys were completed at 0, 3, and 6 months postenrollment. Results: Thirty-nine mothers with depressive symptoms, 6 postpartum doulas, and 6 peer telephone supporters participated. The postpartum doula group, compared with the other 2 groups, had a higher proportion of women with a previous history of depression, and similarly, a higher proportion of women who were depressed and receiving depression treatment at the 6-month follow-up. Satisfaction with study-sponsored support was greater in the postpartum doula group than in the telephone support group. Conclusions: It is feasible to recruit postpartum doulas, peer telephone supporters, and mothers with depressive symptoms for a peer support intervention trial. Mothers were more satisfied with postpartum doulas than peer telephone support. The authors recommend further research to assess the benefit of postpartum doula support for postpartum depression as adjunctive or alternative therapy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2150131912451598

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gjerdingen, D. K., McGovern, P., Pratt, R., Johnson, L., & Crow, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • HealthEast Care System (US)
Corresponding author
Gjerdingen, Dwenda Kay
Venue
Journal of Primary Care & Community Health
Published
2012-06-20
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
36-43
ISSN
  • 2150-1319 (ISSN-L)
  • 2150-1327
OpenAlex
W2324401128
Cited by
61
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
0.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Primary Care & Community Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
Keywords
postpartum depression, peer support programs, feasibility, maternal depression, participant recruitment, participant satisfaction, adjunctive therapy
MeSH terms
Adult, Counseling, Female, Humans, Mothers, Peer Group, Pilot Projects, Pregnancy, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Support, Telephone, Program Evaluation, Patient Satisfaction, Depression, Postpartum, Postpartum Period, Doulas

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review